Walmart: "Worst company in the world"

[The Painter]

If I were her, I'd sue the lawyers.

 

[Oliver]

The sole travesty in this situation is that she wasn't awarded enough to cover her expenses. Everything else, including Walmart's refusal to give her a gift of nearly half a million dollars, is not an issue.

Oh, never mind - your opinion is pretty common among the American media, even the evangelical one:
[SIZE=-1]Results 1 - 10 of about 22 articles for Debbie Shank
[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]Results 1 - 10 of about 16,439 articles for wright obama[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]
[/SIZE]

 

[Jaggy Bunnet]

From the short term account yes, long term no. Guess who get to pay for her long term care now? You an me. Walmart made a profit.

You are wrong. Her own lawyer acknowledges that Walmart were entitled to be repaid out of the settlement. There is no distinction between long term and short term. Why are you trying to suggest there is?

Walmart did not make a profit - they paid out £470k and got back £417k. They made a loss.

She worked for WalMart. At the salery they pay you there are no other options. Take what they give you or be unemployeed. If it were Bill Gates I would agree with you about having a choice.

So nobody else offered better insurance for a lower price than Walmart? Looks like Walmart were, if anything, undercharging for it then. How terribly evil.

They sued her for more than was left AFTER her legal fee's. So basically she paid her monthly insurance payments, and after trying to collect she owed them. What a great business model. Take peoples money and if they file a claim, take even more. We all need to start our own insurance companies like this!

Her lawyer knew that she had total bills in excess of the settlement when he advised that it was accepted. He hoped that some of the people who she owed money (Walmart) would waive the right to receive what they were owed. He was wrong.

I wonder if the lawyer chose to waive the amount that he was owed from the settlement in the same way that he apparently expected Walmart to?

Perhaps you would address the example Tricky gave you and which I have directed you to already. Until you can explain why you should be allowed to collect £20k in his example, there is nothing further to discuss.

To put it in a less charged example, if someone did $10,000 worth of damage to your car, should you be able to collect $10,000 from your insurance and from the guy who did the damage?

 

[chulbert]

Oh, never mind - your opinion is pretty common among the American media, even the evangelical one:
[SIZE=-1]Results 1 - 10 of about 22 articles for Debbie Shank
[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]Results 1 - 10 of about 16,439 articles for wright obama[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]
[/SIZE]

I have no idea what this means.

 

[chulbert]

According to this link, it was a settlement, and they and their lawyer knew of the clawback clause before they agreed to the settlement...They gambled and lost.

Fair enough. I stand corrected.

 

[Daylight]

It's over.

http://deepbackground.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/04/01/848981.aspx

Although it had just contacted Shank's attorney to begin the process of actually collecting the money from Shank and her husband, Wal-Mart announced Tuesday it had reversed its decision and said that it no longer will seek any reimbursement from the Shanks.

 

[Oliver]

It's over.

http://deepbackground.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/04/01/848981.aspx

Wohoo! - Awesome news!

 

[Jaggy Bunnet]

It's over.

http://deepbackground.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/04/01/848981.aspx

Worst? Maybe not.

Dumbest? Maybe. They have managed to get themselves into a position where they have got all of the bad publicity and not got the cash.

 

[Oliver]

Worst? Maybe not.

Dumbest? Maybe. They have managed to get themselves into a position where they have got all of the bad publicity and not got the cash.

Are you talking about Walmart or the current Administration?

Anyway: It's CNN's Top Story as well:

updated 9 minutes ago
Wal-Mart: Injured former worker can keep money

 

[chulbert]

Dumbest? Maybe. They have managed to get themselves into a position where they have got all of the bad publicity and not got the cash.

This came up when discussing the issue with a friend. Even this extreme act of charity will be spun by some into, "something they should have done from the start."

 

[Jaggy Bunnet]

This came up when discussing the issue with a friend. Even this extreme act of charity will be spun by some into, "something they should have done from the start."

No doubt. Of course in some senses it is true.

They must have expected the media to get wind of the story.
They must have known how the media would report it.

So they should have worked out how they would react when that happened. If it meant giving up the cash, then they should have given the cash up BEFORE getting the bad publicity.

 

[E.J.Armstrong]

Yes, and a Wal-Mart employee is also far more likely to have insurance than an employee of Mom & Pop.

Are you talking about the famous Wal Mart dead peasants insurance?

http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/insurance/p64954.asp

Wal Mart is also well known for their other disgusting employee practices including shutting a store down in Canada essentially because the employees wanted union representation. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/09/national/main672748.shtml, What a creepy organisation Wal Mart is.

I refuse to shop at Asda in the UK because Wal Mart owns them and heartily recommend others do the same if they are as appalled as I am by Wal Mart's behaviour towards their workers.

 

[dudalb]

So we can Wal Mart to the long list of things American that EJ hates.
I think Ej really wants to live in world where the USA simply does not exist.

 

[BPSCG]

So we can Wal Mart to the long list of things American that EJ hates.
I think Ej really wants to live in world where the USA simply does not exist.

Nahh... what would he have to complain about, then?

Oh, wait, there's Israel.

 

[Segnosaur]

Wal Mart is also well known for their other disgusting employee practices including shutting a store down in Canada essentially because the employees wanted union representation. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/09/national/main672748.shtml, What a creepy organisation Wal Mart is.

And if such union representation would lead to a situation where the Wal-mart store is inefficient and/or unprofitable, or forces them to increase their prices, should they be forced to keep the store open?

Not all of us are fans of unions.

 

[qayak]

I heard on the news today that Wal Mart has backed off their demands on the money because of the negative publicity. It was on a station out of Bellingham, Washington. Here's an article.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/5666935.html

 

[E.J.Armstrong]

So we can Wal Mart to the long list of things American that EJ hates.
I think Ej really wants to live in world where the USA simply does not exist.

dudalb - I notice that once again you make claims that you fail to support. I've tried on innumerable occasions to get you to support your own claims but with zero success.

You will only be taken seriously when you stop hurling what you clearly believe is personal abuse. But hey ho. We all know your MO by now.

I really do enjoy seeing you expose yourself for what you are.

Do you really believe that your sick campaign of harassment against me will succeed? Following me around hurling abuse is a bit sinister for a proper grown up now isn't it? Sort of smacks of the primary school playground at best and something very nasty at worst.

You will now understand why you were not included in the group of US citizens I addressed in another thread.

 

[E.J.Armstrong]

Nahh... what would he have to complain about, then?

Oh, wait, there's Israel.

Resorting to type BPSCG I see and not one single word of mine in justification of your claim.

And partnering dudalb in his campaign it seems.

 

[E.J.Armstrong]

And if such union representation would lead to a situation where the Wal-mart store is inefficient and/or unprofitable, or forces them to increase their prices, should they be forced to keep the store open?

Not all of us are fans of unions.

I think it is well known that Wal Mart is aggressively against unions in principle and that it has little or nothing to do with the reasons you mentioned.

THe Quebec Labour Board found that
'In September 2005, the Québec Labor Board ruled that the closing of a Wal-Mart store amounted to a reprisal against unionized workers...'

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Wal-Mart

They have also broken state law in forcing people to work during their breaks.

See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6050022.stm

They were forced by China to allow unions yet are still there.

 

[BPSCG]

I think it is well known that Wal Mart is aggressively against unions in principle and that it has little or nothing to do with the reasons you mentioned.

So now that Wal-Mart has let this family have $400,000 of its money even though their own lawyer admits Wal-Mart had no legal obligation to do so, do you now think that Wal-Mart is no longer the worst company in the world?